`No' on Proposition 19

On the surface, legalizing the possession of a small amount of marijuana sounds like a good idea. Can 100 million Americans be wrong?

Should California legalize the possession of an ounce or less or marijuana when federal law prohibits it? Is it possible that one out of three Americans have smoked pot?

That's a smoke screen, put out there by supporters of Proposition 19 on the Nov. 2 ballot. It reeks of "since everyone is doing it, let's legalize it." But there's a huge difference between lighting up in one's living room and getting behind the wheel of a car or truck when the driver is stoned. Prop. 19 would allow that driver to get behind the wheel, and not do much about it until he crashed his car, truck or school bus or broke a traffic law. Even then, it would be difficult for police agencies to determine how much marijuana the driver had smoked.

Proponents maintain that teenagers can easily obtain pot now; Prop. 19 would make it illegal for people younger than 21. (Haven't they heard of fake ID cards many teenagers already have?) It couldn't be sold on school grounds or near a school and couldn't be smoked around minors. (Good luck with that one, parents.)

Medical marijuana already is legal in California, and the Obama administration has said it would not prosecute those users. Getting medical marijuana requires only a farcically easy-to-obtain doctor's prescription. Underage use would be just as easy with fake IDs.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed a bill that downgrades recreational possession of an ounce or less to an infraction, similar to running a red light (that doesn't result in a crash).

Supporters of Prop. 19, including a retired judge, a retired police chief of San Jose and a retired deputy chief of the LAPD, maintain that municipalities would reap "billions" of dollars in taxes from legal marijuana outlets. But since Prop. 19 also would allow cultivation of a limited supply for personal use, who's going to collect those taxes?

Opponents of Prop. 19 include Sen. Dianne Feinstein and L.A. County District Attorney Steve Cooley and both Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman. They rightly point out that since it would be legal to smoke marijuana for recreational use, a driver couldn't be cited until he got into an accident or broke a traffic law. And even then, there's no simple test that, unlike drunken driving, could measure a driver's effectiveness - before a crash.

Prop. 19 is flawed, flies in the face of federal law, is opposed by major law-enforcement officials and politicians and would be abused by underage consumers. Estimates of tax revenue are wildly exaggerated. The argument that once pot is legalized, the burden on law enforcement would be reduced ignores the burden of enforcing underage use. For those consumers ages 21 or older, cops would have to carry a scale. Oh, brother.